The Delhi High Court has dismissed a journalist’s appeal challenging an order to remove her social media post accusing a man of sexual harassment during a flight. A division bench comprising Justices Dinesh Mehta and Vinod Kumar upheld the earlier interim order passed by a single judge, directing the journalist to delete the post on X and refrain from publishing similar allegations until further hearings.
Remarks on social media conduct
The court noted that the journalist had made the allegations publicly before filing a formal complaint, calling the move “overhasty” and suggestive of sensationalism. It also observed that her insistence on keeping the post online reflected misuse of judicial processes. The bench further remarked that the case appeared to be driven more by ego than by a genuine pursuit of legal remedy, adding that urgency was overstated when the matter was mentioned before it.
Background of the case
The controversy dates back to March 11, when the journalist accused a fellow passenger on a Delhi–Mumbai flight of inappropriate physical conduct. Shortly after landing, she shared his photograph and workplace details online, identifying him as a professional associated with PricewaterhouseCoopers. The post gained widespread traction and was amplified by several users, including actor Richa Chadha. The accused, however, denied the allegations and filed a defamation suit, leading to the initial injunction against the journalist and media platforms.
Also Read | Why did the Delhi High Court act against a 2000s Honey Singh-Badshah track now?
Free speech vs right to reputation
In its ruling, the court emphasised that the right to freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) is not absolute and must be balanced against an individual’s right to dignity and livelihood under Articles 21 and 19(1)(g). The bench observed that the journalist’s account had already remained in the public domain for over 20 days, and temporarily restricting the post did not constitute a grave violation of her fundamental rights.
Also Read | Supreme Court orders quick fix for voter list issues before April 6 nomination deadline
‘Digital vigilantism’ flagged
Earlier, the single judge had also criticised certain media houses and public figures for amplifying unverified allegations, terming the trend “digital vigilantism.” With the appeal now rejected, the takedown order remains in force, reinforcing the court’s stance on balancing free expression with accountability in the age of social media.
